Hacker News Reader

Comment by kvetching | Hacker News Reader

Apartments are terrible for people. Why not talk about needs for homes? Why can't America make small 2 bedroom homes anymore as seen in 1950s suburbs. It's either a mansion or an apartment now for new housing.

View on HN

Because more and more of us want walkability and all the amenities that come with it. None of my age ~25 friends have plans about moving to the suburbs, but we are disappointed at how NYC rent increases mean we will struggle to afford a nice place in Manhattan.

People in the US don’t get there’s a middle way between high-rise megacity and suburban wasteland. In the UK I live in a walkable community of detached homes. There’s villages, towns, dense suburbs of cities. The US used to be famous for small town main streets!

There’s some of this on the East coast. But settlement patterns in the US reflect the era in which it was settled. No Roman roads. No Viking villages. No medieval Monasteries or Castles. No stately homes. The U.K. boomed in the Victorian era and is dominated by that kind of housing but the US did not boom until the post-war period so is dominated by car-centric housing.

I grew up in an English village that, apart from a handful of Tudor buildings, was entirely Victorian growth. I imagine that had that growth occurred in the 1950s then it would be a very different place. Indeed by the 1990s almost all the shops had closed and we were effectively a suburb of our local town.

Here in California they used to have main streets but they ripped them all out in the boom, replacing them with thoughtless concrete modernity. Then those all failed when malls were invented and if you’re lucky your city tore it out and you’ve got some fake 90s interpretation of corporate utopia as your downtown.

We don't get it because it doesn't exist. SF is pretty close tbh but unfortunately it's fairly poorly run.

How do y'all reconcile the air and noise pollution living in cities? I see studies posted on HN about how important sleep is and I've been way more sensitive to noise as I age.

Years and years ago I measured sleep disturbances with a fitbit and found sleeping in foam earplugs reduced my wakings by something like 300%.

No answer for air quality. Except is indoor air quality any better in a new suburban house than a new apt in a walkable area?

re indoor air quality: fair point. I bet new apts have less lead in the paint.

That being said, SF is famous for their moldy condos. I've had apt neighbors that smoked cigars, cigs, and weed that crept into my room.

White noise generators work great.

I'm skeptical that white noise would be equal or better to the quiet of suburbia. Especially against high db sounds like firetrucks, helicopters, and trains. Doesn't look like there is much research in this area though.

It does nothing for vibrations/infrasound. Ear plugs or a noise machine can only help with the outside noise but, with many Americans preferring to wear hard sole shoes/boots inside, you are likely to be always aware of your upstairs neighbors movements.

Apartments are also more efficient to climate control assuming you don't try to make every apartment have windows on multiple sides.

>> None of my age ~25 friends have plans about moving to the suburbs

Oh to be young again.

The answer is because it’s no longer cheap to build housing. Developers would loose money building small houses to be sold at market rate. Hence why everything is luxury - it’s those super-size-me margins only this time it’s not greed, it’s necessity. Materials are expensive, labor is expensive, standards for new buildings are high.

The other reason is that during the baby boom we already built on much of the conveniently situated land (flat, close to existing areas and infrastructure, vacant or agricultural). Now we have to go and build out infrastructure, perform grading, tear down the previous building, clean up its toxic waste, etc. It all costs money. Much of Silicon Valley was built on orchards. Now we’re trying to build on superfund sites.

Well-built apartments with good light, soundproofing etc are great, and you can get amenities in the building that would be cost-prohibitive for a single-family home.

I am genuinely curious, why are they terrible for people? Grew up in one, and currently living in one as well (mind you, by choice), and know multiple families (with kids) living a relatively happy life in apartments.

I am not sure if they are terrible for all the people but for me the noise is a huge deal: always had been sleep-deprived when I lived in apartments. On top of that there are tons of tiny things that combine together into miserable conditions: the bare minimum appliances (many apartments don't have even a washer/dryer and ones that have usually come with an electric dryer), pest infestations, mold, tobacco/weed smoke and other smells from neighbors in shared ventilation/windows, slow maintenance, elevated crime activity (an apartment complex parking is a big juicy target for any enterprising thief, as is its mailroom), your deliveries going to your neighbors and their deliveries to you (at any time of night too) etc. etc.

I'd really like to know the reasoning for that as well.

I was in the market for a year and was interested in something outside of a city. I could afford the larger 5 bedroom homes, but had absolutely no use for that amount of space. Nice 2 bedroom homes in the suburbs just aren't a thing for some reason. Smaller homes exist, but the quality drops dramatically.

Perhaps there is an untapped market for high quality 1-2 bedroom homes outside of cities. I'd certainly buy one.

Town houses are currently the answer. I understand they aren't like single family houses but they are better than apartments...

Where I live two bedroom homes in the suburbs can be found in the form of townhomes or one story condominiums units in a two story building.

They’re common on the rental market here. Not sure how often they get purchased outside investors and such.

Except that’s not what consumers want by and large. Most buyers will add more space if they can. Often in anticipation of having a family and needing more space. Easier to grow into a bigger house than move.

> Why can't America make small 2 bedroom homes anymore as seen in 1950s suburbs. It's either a mansion or an apartment now for new housing.

Because it isn't the 1950s anymore. The middle class that was able to afford those homes no longer exists, the rich have gotten exponentially richer, and everyone else has or is increasingly being priced out of housing.

Not sure I buy that. There are a a fair number of people who would be "middle class" by the definition of being able to afford a two-bedroom house (if there were two-bedroom houses to be had), but who can't afford a large three-bedroom house. (It may be fewer than in the 1950s, but it's a lot more than none.)

And to add on there's lots of people can afford a three bedroom house but it's just too much house which I think was the original sentiment. Of the people who are buyers that I'm directly associated with I'm seeing people who can practically pay cash for a house but they are just not seeing new construction that is appealing to them. It's too much house for a lot of people especially when you think about the long term expenses of owning such a large structure. If there wasn't a demand for good+ quality smaller buildings for people that have the ability to buy the concept of 'downsizing' wouldn't be as much of a thing. These people would happily buy new construction for full sticker but the long-term logistics of managing that property just is not what they want. Even when I was home buying none of these cut-and-paste mansions fit what I need it for and they were so expensive that doing modest customization to them to make them suitable for my needs priced me out. While there are many issues in the US housing market the build/reno as an investment vs. build to suit or reno to suit is certainly a slice.

Suburbia is TERRIBLE from long-term efficiency and sustainability point of view. They create car-centric living style which is very hard to get rid off after it settles in.

Here is a really good video about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0

Questionable assertions? Spending half day in car to do anything is actually bad for people and planet

Apartments are great. Maybe you haven't been to Europe where most people live in apartments

Maybe we need more than one kind of housing because we have many kinds of people? You may not prefer apartments, but they can work well for lots of people with different needs, preference and life circumstances.

Apartments are so terrible for people, that almost every US city has to make sure to ban them from most of the residential land. Can't have people making the wrong choice of housing.

If they sold well they would be built. People would rather rent an apt that uses all their disposable income than level with reality that a tiny 2bd home is what they can afford to buy. "but the amenities, location, and view in an apt" I can assure you an expensive home has all of these.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com